Nashville 22nd among Population Gainers

But the economy is stifling migration as suburban and exurban housing booms are now but a memory.

Correcting the Record on Davidson County Growth

The Tennessean's report on suburban growth mentions Davidson Co. in comparison:

Davidson County saw a less than 1 percent increase in its population growth from 2006-07, ranking No. 44 on the list. Even that would be considered steady growth compared with other parts of the country

Prompting calls for correction at the Nashville Charrette:

As usual, The Tennessean bungles the story by focusing only on % growth and completely missing the Davidson correction [made late in the Census]. The 2007 population for Davidson County is 619,626 and the corrected 2006 figure is 613,856. Davidson had a nominal growth of 5,770 from 06 to 07, the fifth highest nominal gain in the state, and nominal growth of 49,276 from 2000 to 2007, the second highest in the state. Only Rutherford County gained more people from 2000 to 2007.

Expect the Tennessean piece to generate the usual round of mantras about how suburbs are so much less taxing than cities and that stupendous growth reflects an exclusively anti-revenue mood, but let's make sure that the census details are not ignored in the beginning just to score group-think points.

Has Tennessee's Population Growth Passed 6 Million?

According to one urbanplanet.org thread, the Census Bureau has released its 2000-2005 population growth estimates. For Tennessee, those estimates show progressive growth, including +1.2% from 2004 to 2005. For perspective's sake, the state with the largest rate increase in that period in this region is Florida, with +2.3%. Both Georgia and North Carolina are growing faster also at a +1.7% clip, matching Texas's growth rate from 2004 to 2005.

One commenter says that the estimates do not include Davidson County's estimated growth in that time, so the state population may well be above 6 million now, rather than at the 5.96 million Census estimate. The growth is noteworthy, but the most significant question remains: are we managing population growth well or are we virtually becoming a mismanaged and overgrown patch of kudzu, briars, and thistle?

North End 2000-2010 Growth On Pace To Outpace Other Near-Downtown Neighborhoods, According To Metro Planning

North End growth is incredible. Those of us who live here know it anecdotally. I have some stats that back it up.

I recently contacted Metro's Planning Department to get some demographic data for the North End just in case it was needed in efforts to keep Jones School open. They referred me to a survey of the various census tracts around Davidson county. The survey focused on population and household changes from 2000 to 2004 and projected those changes through 2010.

Salemtown is included in the census tract bordered by the Cumberland River, Jefferson Street, and the north I-65 loop (#140 on this map). That tract also encompasses Germantown and the neighborhood around Cheatham Place public housing.

I was not surprised to find that the North End is moving in double digit positive growth, in terms of both population change (+12.8%) and household change (+14.1%). Those numbers confirm what many of us here experience and see: an explosion of people buying and developing property and moving into the neighborhoods. I'm assuming that these numbers were crunched in 2004; my guess is that if they were revised this year the upward trend in both categories would be even more pronounced.

I was surprised to see that very few other neighborhoods near downtown were growing at the rate that the North End is. The exception is the Downtown core itself, which is expected in some cases to experience triple digit growth until 2010 (the most prominent examples of which are The Gulch on the west side and Rolling Mill Hill on the southeast side). Neighborhoods in the West End are not expected to match the North End's growth (12 South comes the closest). And I was surprised to see that the East End neighborhoods (running from the I-24 east loop to Inglewood) are not keeping pace with North End growth. A reason for less projected growth on the west and east (relatively speaking) is probably because their growth has peaked and they are reaching the saturation point, but I guess I assumed that the differences in growth percentages would not be as large as they are, even though the West End and the East End are more developed. I reckoned that the tendency of those neighborhoods to sprawl farther (and thus be larger) than the North End would have balanced differences in growth rates.

We feel like we got into the North End at the best time we could, but given the the planning data, only Downtown itself has more growth potential over the next five years. So, it continues to be a good opportunity for those considering a move to urban neighborhoods.